DIGNITY OF THE FINAL AND BINDING NATURE OF DKPP DECISIONS VIEWED FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF LEGAL CERTAINTY AND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE

The base principle of legal certainty is to guarantee that the law must be enforced properly and appropriately, this is because the main purpose of law is certainty. The DKPP's decision is final and binding, so it meant that no legal action could be taken, according to the judicial review of Law Number 15 of 2011 about General Election Organizers. The Constitutional Court of Indonesia (Mahkamah Konstitusi) through its decision Number 31/PUU-XI/2013 interprets that the final and binding nature of DKPP decisions is for the President, KPU, Provincial KPU, Regency/Municipal KPU, and Bawaslu. This creates legal uncertainty, which contradicts with the base principle of law. Furthermore, in terms of consequences, there is no legal mechanism for a group that fell there are violations of the election administrators to seek for justice. The results of this study show that the DKPP's decision should still be interpreted as final and binding like the decision of the Constitutional Court. DKPP decisions which are followed up through decisions of the President, KPU, and Bawaslu should also not be subject to legal action in the Administrative Court, because the KTUN issued is based on the results of the judicial examination based on the provisions applicable laws and regulations. Though, it is necessary to find a solution to provide a sense of justice for those who are harmed due to violations of the ethics of election organizers. Because the purpose of the law is not only to provide sanctions for the violator but also to provide legal protection for the victim.